wfn.org | Independent Lutheran Journals Debate Full Communion Proposal

[News News <NEWS@ELCA.ORG>]

ELCA NEWS SERVICE

August 5, 1999

INDEPENDENT LUTHERAN JOURNALS DEBATE FULL COMMUNION PROPOSAL
99-199-FI

     CHICAGO (ELCA) -- Several independent journals addressing the
Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA) presented various
positions on a proposal which outlines a relationship of "full
communion" between the ELCA and The Episcopal Church.  The Lutheran
Commentator opposed the proposal; two publications of the American
Lutheran Publicity Bureau (ALPB), Delhi, N.Y., supported the plan.
     "Called to Common Mission (CCM): A Lutheran Proposal for a
Revision of the Concordat of Agreement" must be approved by two-thirds
of the ELCA Churchwide Assembly, meeting Aug. 16-22 in Denver, before it
can be offered to the Episcopal Church.  CCM charts a course for
Lutheran-Episcopal full communion which would open possibilities for the
exchange of clergy and other cooperative ministries.
     ALPB publishes Lutheran Forum quarterly and Forum Letter monthly.
The Rev. Ronald B. Bagnall, Grace Lutheran Church, Trenton, N.J., edits
Lutheran Forum.  The Rev. Russell E. Saltzman, Christ Lutheran Church,
Stover, Mo., edits Forum Letter.
     A round of Lutheran-Episcopal dialogues that began in 1983
developed a proposal for full communion between the two churches, "The
Concordat of Agreement," and issued it in 1991.
     A convention of the Episcopal Church approved the Concordat in
1997.  The proposal failed to win a two-thirds majority of the ELCA
assembly that year by six votes.  The assembly asked that the Concordat
be revised, taking its debate into account and clarifying the technical
language of the dialogue.  CCM was issued in November 1998 as that
revision.
     Lutherans and Episcopalians agree on the doctrine of "apostolic
succession," an ongoing faithful proclamation of Christ.  Episcopalians
bring to the relationship the "historic episcopate," a succession of
bishops as a sign of unity back to the earliest days of the Christian
church.
     Many critics of CCM oppose the idea that the ELCA incorporate the
historic episcopate.
     "The only reason for adopting the historic episcopate is to enter
full communion with Episcopalians.  That was one of the arguments made
in support of episcopal succession in the first 'Concordat,'" wrote
Saltzman in May 1999.
     "We dismissed it at the time.  We instead argued then that
Lutherans ought to answer the question for themselves, not for the
Episcopalians. That was then and this is now.  We repent of it," said
Saltzman.  "Historic succession is not a question to be answered by
Lutherans alone."
     Saltzman said "there is nothing in 'Called to Common Mission'
implying that we must adopt historic episcopal succession in order to be
recognized as a church by the Episcopalians.  There is every awareness,
though, that we are adopting episcopal succession only for the purpose
of showing that we are in full communion with them.  Adopting an
episcopal polity simply shows how that visible communion is expressed."
     Lutherans enjoy a certain amount of "theological latitude" when it
comes to organizing their church, said Saltzman.
     "Episcopalians are clear: There can be no reconciliation of
ministries unless the ELCA adopts the historic episcopate.  Their
unwavering demand is directly in conflict with Lutheran freedom which
includes the freedom from being required to adopt any particular
structure for true unity," wrote James D. Torgerson, editor of Lutheran
Commentator, published six times a year from Maple Plain, Minn.
     "For Episcopalians, like Catholics, clergy are sacramental
mediators between Christ and believers:  No bishop, no church (in its
fullness).  No priest, no communion," said Torgerson in a direct
response to Saltzman published on the Commentator's Web site.
     "For Lutherans, the church has only one priest, Jesus Christ
himself.  He does not need sacramental bishops who alone can ordain, or
sacramental priests who make Communion happen," said Torgerson.  "Luther
rejected this traditional Catholic system in which clergy are special
mediators.  He taught that Christ himself is the sole mediator in the
speaking of the Word and administering of the sacraments."
     "Episcopalians do not accept Lutherans as we are.  They insist
that we take on their sacramental, historic episcopate," said Torgerson.
     Bagnall, in a Spring 1999 editorial with three former editors of
Lutheran Forum, said the 16th century reformers who shaped the Lutheran
church "did not totally reject but conservatively revised the
traditional orders for Baptism, confession, the Eucharist and
ordination."
     "Their deepest desire was to maintain the episcopal polity of the
Western Church.  And they solemnly pledged that they would not omit
anything that would serve Christian unity and concord," wrote Bagnall;
the Rev. Paul R. Hinlicky, docent in systematic theology, Lutheran
Theological Faculty, Comenius University, Bratislava, Slovakia; the Rev.
Leonard R. Klein, Christ Lutheran Church, York, Pa.; and the Rev. Glenn
C. Stone, Jackson Heights (Queens), N.Y.
     The Lutheran Forum editors confessed opposing the Concordat in
1997 and "applauded" two revisions made by CCM:  "The historic
episcopate may be received by the ELCA from other Lutheran churches in
episcopal succession as well as from the Episcopal Church.  Ordained
ministers of the Episcopal Church serving in congregations of the ELCA
will be expected to do so in accord with its (the ELCA's) 'Confession of
Faith.'"
     Other Lutheran journals, such as the quarterly publications
Dialog, St. Paul, Minn., and Lutheran Quarterly, Milwaukee, regularly
feature articles and letters for and against CCM but have not taken
official editorial positions on one side of the subject or the other.
--- --- ---
The Lutheran Commentator's home page is at
<http://www.luthercomment.org/>.

For information contact:
John Brooks, Director (773) 380-2958 or NEWS@ELCA.ORG
http://listserv.elca.org/archives/elcanews.html